I don't even think attendance is declining anyway. All the tickets are sold. Only half the people go to the non Big East games, as they did in the past. Poor big East teams bring in about 3/4 and then the good games are full, just like before.

I think people are underrating just how hard it is to make final 4's, win championships, etc... There are a lot more teams in college than pro.

Jim Boheim11 seasons to make final 4 (before then finished - Sweet 16 4 times, 2nd round 4 times, 1st round, and NIT runner up)15 more seasons until won it all.. .so took 26 years to win it allConsidered a legend for 4 final fours, one championship in 37 seasons

Jim CalhounI find it unfair to count his years at Northeastern.. so13 years at Uconn until first final 4 (3 elite 8's, 2 sweet 16's, second round, 4 NITs, 1 no post season tourny before then)

Tom Crean in 14th season at Indiana / Marquette- Is he really that much better of a coach because he made 1 final 4 (missed touney 6 times, only 1 other sweet 16)

Jamie Dixon has had a TON of success. I refuse to believe that he'd be considered PREMIER / ONE OF GREATEST COACHES EVAAA if crazy games against Villanova, Butler went differently, but since they didn't he needs to go.

In single elimination, March Madness it often takes some time, but Dixon consistently has them in the right position and I honestly feel greater results will come. I find it much more likely for Pitt to do a Wake Forest without him.

Its easy to overreact after probably the worst loss of his career

There aren't that many better out there... and I think STEVE PEDERSON being the one conducting the next potential coaching search can't be overlooked. I'll put my faith in Dixon over Pederson finding a replacment

As of 2011, Boeheim's teams have won about 3 more games than expected. Last year they lost to a #2 seed so the number may be lower (though they got there without their center, who was suspended because he can't read and cheated on a test). Calhoun's teams won almost 5 games more than expected. Dixon's teams lost 4.59 more games than expected. Don't compare them.

Total results of where they've finished in bracket match up favorably for Dixon thus far in his career. You want to punish him for better overall results because of a seeding expectancy statistic? By your argument all those coaches missing tourney completely > losing as an 8 seed to a 9 seed.

Dixon isn't missing a "clutch" gene because of a layup as time expires and crazy foul. Clutch = small sample size

Last edited by IanMoran on Fri Mar 22, 2013 2:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

IanMoran wrote:Total results of where they've finished in bracket match up favorably to Dixon thus far in his career. You want to punish him for better overall results because of a seeding expectancy statistic? By your argument all those coaches missing tourney completely > losing as an 8 seed to a 9 seed.

Dixon isn't missing a "clutch" gene because of a layup as time expires and crazy foul. Clutch = small sample size

It was harder to make the tourney before 1985. In Boeheim's first year only 32 teams made the tourney. 68 teams make the tourney now. If you're a team from a power conference you basically have to go .500 in the conference and win 11-12 cupcake games, so getting to the dance isn't the same accomplishment it was in the 60s and 70s. And you would certainly expect a #1 seed to get past the opening weekend, which Pitt failed to do the last time they had a #1 seed.

The players have changed, yet his teams consistently come up small, get pushed around despite claims of being physical, and break down on defense every March. Think back to the 2004 team that was supposedly super-tough but got tossed aside by Oklahoma State, or the 2008 team that was supposedly ready to battle anyone that Michigan State demolished. Those two teams were actually tough instead of simply acting the part. They consistently fail to handle pressure (6 turnovers in the opening 7 minutes yesterday) or make crushing mental mistakes (Nasir Robinson) once the lights get brighter. Yet somehow it's not Dixon's fault. How many times do the same things have to happen before they are no longer isolated instances? Previously the excuse was that Pitt tried too hard to win the Big East tourney because of all the NY based players like Knight, Krauser et al. and wore themselves out. Now they consistently flop in the Big East tourney (1-5 the last 5 years, the one win being over a lousy St. John's team) so that excuse no longer holds water.

I don't know how anyone could be "thrilled". I guess a "meh" could be understandable.

He's done a ton for Pitt Basketball as a coach, but at this point the program is stagnant. Expectations are greater than they were when he took the job, and understandably so. Is Pitt in a better place than before Dixon took over... of course they are, but at some point they have to take the next step, and I don't know if Dixon is the guy to do that at this point.

Next year in the ACC is gonna be interesting. 70ish points a game isn't gonna do it most nights.

I'll be thrilled to take "stagnant" every day. That is, if "stagnant" means that despite working in a city with well below-average excitement for the local college teams, the guy makes his team a lock for the NCAA tournament pretty much every year, which implies that during the course of pretty much every season I'll have a significant number of days when I can see my team winning.

(speaks as the guy who lived through some astoundingly bad years of Pitt basketball, and now lives in a top college town that has not seen an NCAA berth in a very, very long time - all that while constantly firing one coach after another so that the team does not become "stagnant".)

Plus, just based on the law of large numbers, if Dixon continues putting the team into the Tournament, the Final 4 will *eventually* come even if the chances of advancing in subsequent rounds are below 50%!

[If a team lead by Dixon has 40% chance of advancing into any subsequent round, then the chance of making the Final 4 is 0.4^4 = 2.56%. But, if he gets his team to the tournament 27 times, there is 1- (1-0.0256)^27 = 50.4% chance he will get them into at least one Final 4! ]